The Visual Studio 2015 Community Edition is essentially the same as the Visual Studio 2015 Professional Edition. As it stands, the only real reason to use this tag is for license clarification. Which is off topic anyway.

As such, it's probably better to put this as a synonym of the broader visual-studio-2015 tag.

At the same time this tag has previously been proposed to be a synonym of the no longer existing visual-studio-2015-ce, because of which this can't be corrected without moderator intervention.

The differences are outlined on the feature comparison. But these differences are again License only. E.g. the Team Foundation Server issues are part of the Community Edition, but the license doesn't allow the usage unless a CAL is purchased seperately. If you connect to a TFS server and have a Client Access License, you get all these features, they are part of the Community Edition, are installed by default, but not licensed with it. Apart from that, they're still equal.

Plus, there are no vs-pro, vs-enterprise, vs-ultimate, vs-test-pro tags. And we can do without them just fine it seems. And on top of that many of the individual features have their own tags, so [visual-studio] + [uml] works much better than [vs-pro] or [vs-ultimate].

If the only difference is license issues, then the separate tags are not needed and should be burninated.
– LundinMar 3 '17 at 12:04

There are extensions that will install in Community but not in Pro, or vice versa, and questions about this might be topical. But I don't think that's enough to warrant a separate tag.
– user743382Mar 4 '17 at 21:24

Right, and the same is true for pro vs ultimate. And those have never had a separate tag. Plus lots of Qs regarding vs in general are tagged community edition.
– jessehouwingMar 5 '17 at 8:52

1

I've just done the first 2. I'll give some time for some meta-discussion to take place before doing the 3rd as well.
– MattMar 5 '17 at 10:27

@Matt Thanks! We'll get this whole visual studio tag soup cleaned up at some point :)
– jessehouwingMar 5 '17 at 10:29

@Matt looks like there was no discussion. Should we proceed?
– Vadim KotovAug 4 '17 at 12:23

1 Answer
1

Possible Solution:
as it has only small impacts on features, it would be ok to merge the tags, and questions regarding the special features may add the tag of that feature, this also increases readability.

TL;DR It does have no impact on how code is compiled, but some features of the IDE are only available for the Professional or the Enterprise-Edition

I have to state that there are (minor) differences between the community edition and the licensed edition,
They may have no big effect on the usage of the different tags, but it is different

Here you can find a list with all the differences between the versions:

But do those differences effect how the code compiles in the different versions? AFAIK no.
– NathanOliverMar 3 '17 at 13:12

1

You need to think about the questions that are being asked with this tag. There are mayor swathes of shared functionality. That one is missing "UML® 2.0 Compliant Diagrams" most likely wouldn't change the average question that this tag gets with.
– BraiamMar 3 '17 at 13:16

As stated in the answer, it does not have a big effect, so no effect on the compiling but it does have an effect on for example the possibility of testing web applications
– Florian KMar 3 '17 at 13:17

1

+1; SO is for both compiling and tools for programmers. The tool is different in ways separate from compiling.
– Yakk - Adam NevraumontMar 3 '17 at 14:50

The Team Foundation Server issues are again license only. If you connect to a TFS server and have a Client Access License, you get all these features, they are part of the Community Edition, are installed by default, but not licensed with it. Apart from that, they're still equal. Plus, there are no vs-pro, vs-enterprise, vs-ultimatevs-test-pro tags. And on top of that many of the individual features have their own tags, so [visual-studio] + [uml] works much better than [vs-pro] or [vs-ultimate].
– jessehouwingMar 3 '17 at 14:54

@jessehouwing yes you are probably right with that, it is also better for readability
– Florian KMar 3 '17 at 15:23

Updated the Original Post to reflect this additional data.
– jessehouwingMar 3 '17 at 15:27

Updated the Answer with a possible solution, which you have provided, and because of thats partly your idea, I transformed it into a community wiki
– Florian KMar 3 '17 at 15:33